Liveness: Performance in a Mediatized Culture By Philip Auslander
A Discussion of the content in this book and related materials
Brian Tuohy 40068747
MUS7020 Sonic Arts 14th November 2011 1100 Words
Performance has been described as “an ephemeral art form that disappears even as it is appearing”, the strength of which is derived from its sui generis ontology of nonreproducibility (Klein 2000). It is claims such as this that support the idealized view of performance as intrinsically transgressive and place it beyond the jurisdiction of hegemonic representation. Live performance can accordingly be regarded with a reverence that distinguishes it from recordings, and creates a clear distinction between the two. Peggy Phelan suggests that a performance can be seen as something that is true only in the moment and cannot be recreated (Phelan 1993). The performance assumes the role of the ‘real’ state of the music, while any form of recording is merely a second-hand representation, and inherently less accurate (Auslander 1999). The result is a relationship of binary opposition, where music can exist in either a live or mediatized form, but not both. This leads Phelan to suggest that there is a clear ontological distinction between that which can be considered ‘live’ and a mediatized representation (Phelan 1993). This attitude of veneration for live performance while veritably disregarding mediatized representation is contested by Auslander in his book ‘Liveness: Performance in a Mediatized Culture” (Auslander 1999). Auslander implies that such assumptions on the nature of performance merely invoke “clichés and mystifications” – such as the existence of an “energy” between performer and spectator in a performance –, which are of little assistance when attempting to situate performance in relation to a mediatized culture (Auslander 1999).
It is also posited that the distinction between live and mediatized
representation is not only indistinct, but that the very existence of the notion of ‘live’
is attributable to the availability of a mediatized alternative. Here, Auslander echoes Baudrillard’s theory that we refer to performance as ‘live’ in order to distinguish it from a recorded equivalent with which it could be replaced. Without this alternative reproduction, the concept of live performance would not exist – there would simply be music. Indeed, according to Auslander, it could be said that the existence of a recorded alternative is precisely what ascribes performance its value – the desire for a live alternative exists due to the presence of mediatized representation rather than in spite of it. Traditional concepts suggest that much of the allure of live performance lies in the sense of immediacy, community and involvement that exists when performer and audience are temporally and spatially co-present (Schwierin 2011). This presents the possibility of involvement, deviation from a prescribed plot and direct contact between involved parties. Auslander responds to this point by proposing that it is based on a false concept of ‘unity’ such as that associated with theatre, where there is actually a clear separation between the defined roles of actor and audience (Auslander 1999). In the prescribed text, Auslander takes issue with the widespread privileging of live performance over mediatized versions. The mediatization of music is implied as a result of the spread of mass media. The advent of recording technologies in the 20th century resulted in the mass reproduction of artistic material.
This essentially
presented the public with the notion of mass replication of art, and society became acclimatized to the new choices in methods of consumption (Auslander 1999).
Upon the introduction of television, all broadcasts were initially live, and attempted to recapture the immediacy of theatre. This relationship changed as television became the driving force in a mediatized society. On this topic, Auslander points out that the general reaction of live performance to the dominance of mediated forms is to “become as much like them as possible”. Similarly, Auslander refers to Marshall McLuhan, who stated that a new medium does not leave an old medium in peace; it oppresses it until it has been reshaped and resituated. With this threat in place, music and live performance adjusted in order to become more like television. In this scenario, the mass reproduction becomes the standard that is regarded as what is ‘real’, and the live equivalent exists as an attempt to validate the initial truth proposed by such a representation. This also exists in the arena of rock concerts, where the live performance can be seen as an attempt to validate the previously presented music video or CD - “if the mediatized image can be recreated in a live setting, it must have been ‘real’ to begin with” (Auslander 1999). This realization of dependence on the mediatized equivalent within a “mediatic system”, and subsequent adaptation to suit the associated expectations is what has been described in the text as ‘remediation’. Remediation such as this has led to a purported devaluing of live performance in popular music due to phenomena such as lip-syncing and the associated scandals of artists such as Milli Vanilli. Even respected musicians such as Luciano Pavarotti have chosen to use prerecorded materials in place of singing live due to the existence of too many variables which could lead to a performance that falls below the expectations
the audience possess as a result of the mediatized representations with which they are familiar (Wakin Jan. 22 2009). One situation where live performance is still held in high regard, however, is in the legal system, where witness testimony – the performance of recalling events from memory in front of an audience – is seen as a verified passage to truth. In this respect, the performance equates to something that can be measured, assessed and accurately documented – contradicting Phelan’s previously mentioned suggestions of fleeting, irreproducible qualities. Auslander proposes that this view that witness testimony can “somehow give rise to the truth” is based on uncontested assumptions and perhaps mistakenly attributes an ideological respect for this kind of live performance. Far from being disconnected from live performance, methods of mediatization and representation have been implemented into live performance in a form where they offer themselves as a contrapuntal improvisation tool (Morris 2008). This can be seen in the work of Jeffrey Morris, who uses recorded material that only exists within the performance and becomes a part of the immediate performance, creating variations on performed material. This suggests that forms of mediatization can not only exist in tandem with live performance but can also become a useful tool as part of the performance itself. To conclude, one need only refer again to the text. Auslander argued that, contrary to the assumptions of “conventional wisdom”, there is no clear basis upon which one can define a distinct ontological separation between live performance and mediatized representation. In fact, it is suggested that the two be considered in a historical, contingent relationship, rather than a relationship of binary opposition.
Bibliography Auslander, P. 2008, Liveness : performance in a mediatized culture, 2nd edn, Routledge, London. Auslander, P. 2006, "Liveness: Performance and the anxiety of simulation" in The popular music studies reader, eds. A. Bennett, B. Shank & J. Toynbee, Routledge, , pp. 85. Auslander, P. 2005, "At the Listening post, or, do machines perform?", International journal of performance arts and digital media, vol. 1, no. 1. Auslander, P. 1999, Liveness : Performance in an mediatized culture, Routledge, London. Auslander, P. 1997, From acting to performance: essays in modernism and postmodernism, Routledge. Benjamin, W. 1969, "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction (1936)" in Illuminations: Essays and Reflections, ed. H. Arendt, Shocken, , pp. 217-252. Croft, J. 2007, "Theses on liveness", Organised sound: An international journal of music technology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 59. d'Escrivan, J. 2006, "To Sing the Body Electric: Instruments and Effort in the Performance of Electronic Music", Contemporary Music Review, vol. 25, no. 12, pp. 181-191. Klein, J. 2000, "Real Events.", PAJ: A Journal of Performance and Art, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 130-133. Mock, R. (ed) 2000, Performing Processes: Creating Live Performance, Illustrated edn, Intellect Books, Bristol, UK. Morris, J.M. 2008, "Structure in the dimension of liveness and mediation", Leonardo music journal, vol. 18, pp. 59. Phelan, P. 1993, Unmarked: the politics of performance, Routledge. Sanden, P. 2009, "Hearing Glenn Gould's body: Corporeal liveness in recorded music", Current musicology, , no. 88, pp. 7. Schloss, W.A. 2003, "Using contemporary technology in live performance: The dilemma of the performer", Journal of New Music Research, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 239-242. Schwierin, M. 2011, Digital Liveness: Philip Auslander about digital liveness in historical, philosophical perspective, Transmediale Festival, Berlin.
Stoddard, C. 2009, "Towards a Phenomenology of the Witness to Pain: Dis/Identification and the Orlanian Other", Performance Paradigm. After Effects: Performing the ends of memory, vol. 5, no. 1. Wakin, D.J. Jan. 22 2009, The Frigid Fingers Were Live, but the Music Wasn’t, New York edn, New York Times, Online.
